Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archa

In this argument the author claimed that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. To support this conclusion the claimer provided the evidence that the baskets have been found in another village Lithos, a village across the Brem River which is so broad and deep that the Paleans could have acrossed only by boat from the P village. Unfortunately, the reasoning is lac of cogency, there are some flaws in this argument.

In the first place, the author described that the B River is deep and broad, but, maybe it was not such deep and broad that people could cross it easily without any boats or other vehicles in the ancient years, as the geographic change, it became deep and broad. So the Paleans can trade with the Lithoses easily. Thus, it can`t be proved that the P baskets were not unique.

Even if the B River was deep and broad as it is today, people could cross it only by boat. Boats are not found doesn`t mean the Paleans didn`t have boats, perhaps the boats were floated away with the river, or they would be decayed in the river. Therefore, this assumption is also not persuasive.

Eventually, there could be other vehicles such as rafts could help the Paleans cross the river, in that way, they could transport the baskets to the L village, or some Ps moved to the L and lived there later.

In conclusion, the argument is lack credibility the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer claim. To make the reasoning more convincing, the author should demonstrate that the river is always as ancient days, and the Ps couldn`t cross the river in any conditions at all, the arguer must provide more evidence to validate the conclusion.